Best and worst of Ferdinand .....BestFerdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.WorstFerdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.

I've popped a no in there, based upon the question being an honest one. That is, the innate freedom to express an opinion, however unpopular, ignorant or just plain weird.

But could I ask a question, as it pertains to the EU in general. ?

What if Holocaust denial, (in certain circumstances) is used in part to perpetrate hate or instigate violence against a particular ethnic minority.
Like crimes along the lines of - suspicion of sedition or treason or buying huge amounts of fertilizer, that kind of thing ?

You see in the EU it is legal to just say it didn't happen, but illegal to use it to inflame violence as part of an organised group.
If you see the difference.

(13-03-2012 06:01 AM)Sol Wrote: I've popped a no in there, based upon the question being an honest one. That is, the innate freedom to express an opinion, however unpopular, ignorant or just plain weird.

But could I ask a question, as it pertains to the EU in general. ?

What if Holocaust denial, (in certain circumstances) is used in part to perpetrate hate or instigate violence against a particular ethnic minority.
Like crimes along the lines of - suspicion of sedition or treason or buying huge amounts of fertilizer, that kind of thing ?

You see in the EU it is legal to just say it didn't happen, but illegal to use it to inflame violence as part of an organised group.
If you see the difference.

Germany

(1) Whoever, in a manner that is capable of disturbing the public peace:

incites hatred against segments of the population or calls for violent or arbitrary measures against them; or
assaults the human dignity of others by insulting, maliciously maligning, or defaming segments of the population,

shall be punished with imprisonment from three months to five years.

(...)

(3) Whoever publicly or in a meeting approves of, denies or belittles an act committed under the rule of National Socialism of the type indicated in Section 6 subsection (1) of the Code of Crimes against International Law, in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine.

(4) Whoever publicly or in a meeting disturbs the public peace in a manner that assaults the human dignity of the victims by approving of, denying or rendering harmless the violent and arbitrary National Socialist rule shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine. (...)

France

Art 9. – As an amendment to Article 24 of the law of July 29, 1881 on the freedom of the press, article 24 (a) is as follows written: <<Art. 24 (a). - those who have disputed the existence of one or more crimes against humanity such as they are defined by Article 6 of the statute of the international tribunal military annexed in the agreement of London of August 8, 1945 and which were a carried out either by the members of an organization declared criminal pursuant to Article 9 of the aforementioned statute, or by a person found guilty such crimes by a French or international jurisdiction shall be punished by one month to one years imprisonment or a fine.

Czech Republic

The person who publicly denies, puts in doubt, approves or tries to justify nazi or communist genocide or other crimes of nazis or communists will be punished by prison of 6 months to 3 years.

Belgium

Article 1 Whoever, in the circumstances given in article 444 of the Penal Code denies, grossly minimises, attempts to justify, or approves the genocide committed by the German National Socialist Regime during the Second World War shall be punished by a prison sentence of eight days to one year, and by a fine of twenty six francs to five thousand francs. For the application of the previous paragraph, the term genocide is meant in the sense of article 2 of the International Treaty of 9 December 1948 on preventing and combating genocide. In the event of repetitions, the guilty party may in addition have his civic rights suspended in accordance with article 33 of the Penal Code.

European Union

European Union Framework Decision for Combating Racism and Xenophobia (2007)

The text establishes that the following intentional conduct will be punishable in all EU Member States:

- Publicly inciting to violence or hatred , even by dissemination or distribution of tracts, pictures or other material, directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin.

- Publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivialising

- crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes as defined in the Statute of the International Criminal Court (Articles 6, 7 and 8) directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin, and

- crimes defined by the Tribunal of Nuremberg (Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal, London Agreement of 1945) directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin.

Member States may choose to punish only conduct which is either carried out in a manner likely to disturb public order or which is threatening, abusive or insulting.

The reference to religion is intended to cover, at least, conduct which is a pretext for directing acts against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin.

Member States will ensure that these conducts are punishable by criminal penalties of a maximum of at least between 1 and 3 years of imprisonment.

-----

You see Sol, inciting hatred is just one of them. It is not the only one.

Despite me jokingly voting yes (because lighting the mood is a good thing), I must say. Even though I think holocaust deniers are fugging grassholes, I think they have the right to spout out the nonsense they want to. Hell, atheists have the right to speak out loud (no matter how aggressive or not), so why can't they?

And plus it is a moral booster. It lets me know that, despite thinking that I am stupid sometimes, there is always someone dumber out there.

Of course it was such a violent, cruel time, all the things that happened, and all the people who died, and all the people who have never been put in front of a judge for the things they did to people in the camps etc. So only going by that I would say yes, it should be a crime to deny it.
Also the fact that I pointed out "over there" that people today, 60 years later, still want this time to come back because they are of the opinion that jews indeed are not humans and the "arier race" is the future and so on... And it is dangerous to feed that by allowing them to spread this mindset.

On the other hand everyone has the right to research stuff and build an own opinion, and especially to voice the opinion.

It is a fine line but I tend towards the yes although I am not convinced that it would help anyone to make it a crime.
In Germany especially we have lots of rules concerning the whole topic. You can't say certain phrases because they will get you in trouble, you can't speak positively about 2nd world war, you can't openly say that it wasn't bad or nothing has ever happened. If you ask someone who has the mindset of denial about it they will tell you that "Well, I am not allowed to say it didn't happen" which says more than a thousand words.

"Freedom is the freedom to say that 2+2=4" - George Orwell (in 1984)
- Wotsefack?! -